Featured How are believers "Drawn" to Christ?

Nope. τασσω is passive so it cannot be what you want it to be. Grammar matters.

The Archangel

 

This issue with the Matthew 28:16 passage is this: In Matthew 28:16, τασσω is a verb and it is in the "middle" voice. In the middle voice, τασσω is actually "active." "Jesus" is the subject of the verb. Jesus does not direct the apostles by mutual consent.

In Acts, τασσω is not a verb; it is a participle, and it is passive. So... the people appointed were not appointing themselves.

The Archangel

 

Thank you for explaining the rules for Biblical Greek on these passages. It is appreciated.

it’s been a while since I have seen you post. Good to see you again.

peace to you

 

But some people are self-appointed.... oh never mind.

 

Obfuscation!!!! LOL

 

Ummm... that's not what passive means... Passive means the subject is not doing the action, but is acted upon.

Secondarily, Acts 13:48 is not a speech of Paul, nor is it a quote of Paul. It is Luke's narration of the events.

So, you are incorrect on two counts.

The Archangel

 

No, not at all.

No, not at all.

In no way that that view actually match the tone, timbre, or grammar of the passage.

The passage is: ἀκούοντα δὲ τὰ ἔθνη ἔχαιρον καὶ ἐδόξαζον τὸν λόγον τοῦ κυρίου καὶ ἐπίστευσαν ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον This bold section is the clause in question.

The wooden translation is: Hearing this, the Gentiles were rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord and believed. Then, he answers an implied question by clarifying who is was who believed: As many as had been appointed to eternal life.

So, Luke goes the extra mile here to explain who it was who believed (as many as were appointed) and why they believed (they were appointed). That the clause in question "As many as had been appointed to eternal life" is saved for the end of the sentence in order to give emphasis (that's how Greek works).

You are simply not correct.

The Archangel

 

Archangel, you are saying all the right things. I'm sure this forum is low on your totem pole of priorities, seeing your grasp of Greek. Thanks for your input, brother.

 

So folks, let’s review..

1. When someone who actually knows and understands Biblical Greek gives an in-depth explanation why the OP is wrong concerning Biblical Greek… it is still characterized as “nonsense” and “obfuscation”.

2. The OP clearly does not understand Biblical Greek, but is so focused on disproving “Calvinism” intellectual integrity is sacrificed to cling to misguided interpretations.

There is no way to discuss these issues with folks like that. No amount of biblical truth will sway them. No amount of expert analysis will convince them.

The OP has been Biblically and thoroughly corrected.

The only response will be “taint so”.

Peace to you

 

LOL This is what I posted:

The OP posted:

You do not need to be a prophet nor the son of a prophet to predict how the OP will respond. DUH!! LOL

peace to you

 

Canadyjd, you are obviously a t'aint-soer. Nothing will convince you that his views are right, not even twisting someone's own words to misrepresent what they said. Fyi, I am almost about to give up on him.

 

My response wasn't one of your so-called "taint so" posts. I gave this explanation.... to which you said "taint so..."

In no way did you interact with what I wrote, other than to say "no." You gave no reason or cause that I might be incorrect, other than to suggest that your opinion about a particular word or passage trumps all scholarship to the contrary. So, not only are you being hypocritical in this, you are also demonstrating elements of narcissism.

The Archangel

 

What does that even mean????

The Archangel